I saw the midnight release of it, and despite how tired I was I really enjoyed it. To be so vehemently against it when it does so many things better than the original Tobey McGuire film reeks of ludicrous fanboy "The story wasn't what I expected from the comics!" expectations. Peter Parker wasn't as blatantly earnest and cliche nerd stereotype, there was more depth to him in this. He felt so much more like a real kid with believable angst who was just bullied because people are dicks, and it's just absurd to dismiss him as an emo hipster like Bob does. Ben felt much more like a real father, and Gwen Stacy was less ethereal and unreachable than Mary Jane. Yeah, the villain wasn't all that great but even if his motivations are somewhat weak, he's better as the Lizardman than the Green Goblin throwing lame puns and a plastic clunky costume.

The best thing about this though is that the fight choreography is smarter. Spiderman isn't just punching and kicking everything in this, he's using a lot more webslinging, and using balance, acrobatics, and physics to his advantage to overcome his enemies.

Bottom Line: Take this review with a grain of salt, and if you were initially curious about the film, go see it. Are you going to go with one raging, spitting critic, or the aggregate of Top critics who gave this a 74%?

I may have to go see this soon just to spite Bob. I've grown tired of his negative, fanboy-based reviews that simply boil down to "They didn't make it the way I would've, so I don't like it". To each their own, as the saying goes. I would like Spidey to return to Marvel/Disney though, just so he can get some crossover into the Avengers universe.

Though I will agree that the romance aspect was contrived and somewhat lazy, but I felt it was because they didn't spend enough time on it. Gwen, despite Peter's glaring flaws and hot-headedness halfway through the movie, was suddenly stricken with the guy. Maybe she likes bad boys? I'unno, I just I thought it was dumb.

Every other part of the review though... wow... that was. Wow.... I don't normally watch these, so someone help me out, is Bob usually this angry?

I don't know, I'm probably going to get chewed out for saying it, but I didn't think it was that bad, honestly. It's a comic book movie, for starters, and plot convenience is all over the place in comics. I really didn't mind the smaller scale of it all, seeing as it at least gave the impression that things were going to be more personal.

As for the shift towards Peter's parents, I figure that's something that had to be addressed at some point, either in a comic continuity or in film form. As far as I know, they've always been spies in some form or another, and my guess is it was time for another retcon. The first time I heard about the whole spy parents thingy, the Parkers infiltrated the USSR. It stands to reason they'd retcon that into something more current.

I didn't hate it, overall, but nor did I think it was incredible. It's a lot like a superhero, summer blockbuster version of "Haywire". Entertaining enough, but ultimately forgettable.

SupahGamuh:So they did it!, the greatest achievement of actually making a worse film than Spiderman 3!

This scene alone is better than the entirety of most other superhero movies... including Amazing Spider-man.

I'll say it like this. I did not hate Amazing Spider-man... but I did hate a lot about it. I liked a lot about it too.

That's what's so frustrating to me. Amazing Spider-man has some truly great highs and some truly low lows. When it's good, it's great, when it's bad, it's terrible. There's almost no middle ground... and it ultimately leaves me with an unsatisfied feeling.

I feel it's a movie that is far inferior to what it should have been and yet better than what it could have been. It's neither great nor a disaster, and ultimately left me with a giant huge pit of apathy.

But "The Average Spider-man" doesn't have the same ring to it.

Ultimately, I felt it was a huge retread over the same ground the 2002 movie did, only that movie got to the point and put Spider-Man on the scene in around 30 minutes, while this one takes nearly an hour.

I REALLY hoped they'd pull an Incredible Hulk and just make the origin story a quick montage and get right to the meat of the superheroics and drama... no such luck. I mean, c'mon, nearly an HOUR re-telling us the story of Spider-Man? Again? Who on planet earth doesn't know Spider-man's origin at this point? He's an icon! And the last origin story was barely 10 years ago! I felt like it was a huge waste of time covering familiar ground, with so very, very little change.

The only reason Batman Begins worked was because no Batman film prior to this ever dedicated a film to how Batman became Batman. The 1989 began with him already working as Batman, for instance. But Spider-Man? This is almost more of a remake than a reboot. Just swap out the villains (who are genuinely interchangeable) and the love interest (Emma Stone would've been a far better Mary Jane), and it's practically the same movie, only without a lot of the charm, humor, fun, color, and quirkiness that made the Sam Raimi films endearing.

This review is so full of hate and bile that I cannot accept this professionally. It screams of "I went into this hating it and I want to hate it." Bob's opinions have always been hit or miss with me, and I plan to judge the movie personally without a fanboy filter screaming "sucks sucks sucks sucks" as a guideline.

I'm not sure what to make of this review. It does sound awful, but Bob's histrionics over Green Lantern (which I thought was okay, not as good as I'd hoped but okay) have made me cautious about writing off a film just based on his review. Some of the other posts I've seen here have been less harsh than Bob.

Though I will agree that the romance aspect was contrived and somewhat lazy, but I felt it was because they didn't spend enough time on it. Gwen, despite Peter's glaring flaws and hot-headedness halfway through the movie, was suddenly stricken with the guy. Maybe she likes bad boys? I'unno, I just I thought it was dumb.

Every other part of the review though... wow... that was. Wow.... I don't normally watch these, so someone help me out, is Bob usually this angry?

I thought that shift was kind of jarring too, especially since that was right around when he wasn't paying attention to anyone but the criminal, but it's a small flaw for me.

Bob isn't typically this angry, it's somewhat rare and limited to truly awful movies like Green Lantern, Expendables, or Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen. It was really jarring to hear it here, even though superhero movies are a soft spot for him.

I hate to be this kind of guy, but I really can't describe how happy I am to see that I was totally right about this movie.Also, one of Bob's complaints about the movie feeling coincidental is kind of funny since in the original comics, everything is very much not coincidental. Curt Connors is just some scientist, he doesn't know Spider-Man until later, Doc Ock is also just a guy, hell, Steve Ditko, the original writer/artist/Stan-Lee-collaborator-who-may-or-may-not-have-done-most-of-the-work, is alleged to have left the series originally because he felt it was unrealistic that the Green Goblin "just happened" to be someone Peter Parker knew.I didn't see this on opening night and I have no plans to watch it at any point in the foreseeable future.

SilverHammerMan:I hate to be this kind of guy, but I really can't describe how happy I am to see that I was totally right about this movie.Also, one of Bob's complaints about the movie feeling coincidental is kind of funny since in the original comics, everything is very much not coincidental. Curt Connors is just some scientist, he doesn't know Spider-Man until later, Doc Ock is also just a guy, hell, Steve Ditko, the original writer/artist/Stan-Lee-collaborator-who-may-or-may-not-have-done-most-of-the-work, is alleged to have left the series originally because he felt it was unrealistic that the Green Goblin "just happened" to be someone Peter Parker knew.I didn't see this on opening night and I have no plans to watch it at any point in the foreseeable future.

Don't you think shutting out all possibility of seeing a film based on one critic is a little close minded, especially to gloat about it?

Roger Ebert gave this 3.5/4 Stars, and the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are at 74%.

Sorry, Bob, but I really think you went into this with a huge bias and a lot of unfair bitterness about some of the changes they made. That's how I feel, honestly. A lot of ridiculous hyperbole and vitriol that seeks to ignore a lot of the more effective and entertaining stuff this movie has to offer.

I mean, really: Lizardman looks as bad as that creature from Lost in Space? The costume is as bad as Catwomans? Sorry, but as someone who was dreading this movie, I have to call bull.

The crane scene was incredibly stupid though. Can't get around that. As bad as that AWFUL dancing scene, though? Have you -lost your damn mind-?

HumpinHop:Peter Parker wasn't as blatantly earnest and cliche nerd stereotype, there was more depth to him in this. He felt so much more like a real kid with believable angst who was just bullied because people are dicks, and it's just absurd to dismiss him as an emo hipster like Bob does.

So in other words you're ok if they go off and change a characters and a story and just title it the same, and you're good with it. Is Romeo and Juliet a good Romeo and Juliet if they don't die in the end? You're happy if Hamelet hugs and makes peace with his step father in the end? You're thrilled when the banker doesn't ask for his pound of flesh, and pleased when he doesn't actually try to claim it?

If you're going to make and title a film called The Amazing Spider-man then Parker has an established accepted character. His motivations and moral center are clear. Just about every version of him is very clear on that. But if you're in need of something different go to one of the alternates like 2099. I'm sure people would kill for a Spider-man 2099.

What you have are kids like yourself who think that the Anti-Hero is cool and Parker should be more angry and vengeful. If that's what you want go read Wolverine, Spawn, or even the latest Batman. If you want a Patriotic I always do the right thing no matter what go read Superman, or Cap. And if you want a Tragic Comedy you go read Spider-Man.

SilverHammerMan:I hate to be this kind of guy, but I really can't describe how happy I am to see that I was totally right about this movie.Also, one of Bob's complaints about the movie feeling coincidental is kind of funny since in the original comics, everything is very much not coincidental. Curt Connors is just some scientist, he doesn't know Spider-Man until later, Doc Ock is also just a guy, hell, Steve Ditko, the original writer/artist/Stan-Lee-collaborator-who-may-or-may-not-have-done-most-of-the-work, is alleged to have left the series originally because he felt it was unrealistic that the Green Goblin "just happened" to be someone Peter Parker knew.I didn't see this on opening night and I have no plans to watch it at any point in the foreseeable future.

To be fair, Steve Ditko was hard to work with. He had walked away from many projects for less reasons and would never go back to apologize for what he did, right or wrong.

One of the artists and writers who worked with Stan and Steve said that when Ditko was dying of cancer, there was a push in the industry to have Ditko do some limited edition Spiderman artwork for charity, so he could pay for his cancer treatments. This is a project Stan Lee, who unfortunately gets cast as the villain in this story, would have backed 100 percent mind you. Ditko did not want do it because doing so would meant he needed to swallow his pride.

SilverHammerMan:I hate to be this kind of guy, but I really can't describe how happy I am to see that I was totally right about this movie.Also, one of Bob's complaints about the movie feeling coincidental is kind of funny since in the original comics, everything is very much not coincidental. Curt Connors is just some scientist, he doesn't know Spider-Man until later, Doc Ock is also just a guy, hell, Steve Ditko, the original writer/artist/Stan-Lee-collaborator-who-may-or-may-not-have-done-most-of-the-work, is alleged to have left the series originally because he felt it was unrealistic that the Green Goblin "just happened" to be someone Peter Parker knew.I didn't see this on opening night and I have no plans to watch it at any point in the foreseeable future.

Don't you think shutting out all possibility of seeing a film based on one critic is a little close minded, especially to gloat about it?

Roger Ebert gave this 3.5/4 Stars, and the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are at 74%.

You are preaching to deaf ears bro.A lot of Movie Bob's followers only listen to his opinion, as contrived and fantard as it is.

HumpinHop:Peter Parker wasn't as blatantly earnest and cliche nerd stereotype, there was more depth to him in this. He felt so much more like a real kid with believable angst who was just bullied because people are dicks, and it's just absurd to dismiss him as an emo hipster like Bob does.

So in other words you're ok if they go off and change a characters and a story and just title it the same, and you're good with it. Is Romeo and Juliet a good Romeo and Juliet if they don't die in the end? You're happy if Hamelet hugs and makes peace with his step father in the end? You're thrilled when the banker doesn't ask for his pound of flesh, and pleased when he doesn't actually try to claim it?

If you're going to make and title a film called The Amazing Spider-man then Parker has an established accepted character. His motivations and moral center are clear. Just about every version of him is very clear on that. But if you're in need of something different go to one of the alternates like 2099. I'm sure people would kill for a Spider-man 2099.

What you have are kids like yourself who think that the Anti-Hero is cool and Parker should be more angry and vengeful. If that's what you want go read Wolverine, Spawn, or even the latest Batman. If you want a Patriotic I always do the right thing no matter what go read Superman, or Cap. And if you want a Tragic Comedy you go read Spider-Man.

Keep your paws off my Spider-man you Dark Cruddy Aps

*old man yells at cloud*

I am...really unsure what I've done to offend you so much, especially to the point where you act as bull-headed stubborn as Bob in this review. There's no need to go insulting or generalizing me as a stupid kid who only likes 'angry and vengeful' heroes. There's nothing wrong with approaching Peter a different way, and I don't pidgeon hole myself into only liking Anti-Heroes, it's only when a character trope is executed well that I enjoy it.

You're talking like this butchered Spiderman instead of just telling a similar, but different story, which is exactly what I was looking for. I don't believe Superman has to be exactly one way and stick with the exact same character traits; I really enjoyed Superman: Earth One even though it tinkered with a few things. I understand if you are looking for a more rigid story, but that's just a difference between us that doesn't warrant an attack like that.

Fusioncode9:Looking through these comments is just pathetic. Most people here are deciding not to see the movie because of Bob's pointless fanboy rage. Mos reviews call it a solid film, even Roger Ebert enjoyed it. I've seen the movie and it is NO-WHERE near as bad as Bob is saying. It's no The Dark Knight but it's a overall a solid film.

C'mon guys, form you own opinions!

I formed my opinion months ago when I first saw the trailer. I was not impressed. Every trailer since then made me want to see the movie less and less. If the trailers fails to impress me, then I sure as HELL won't be slapping down money to see the full thing. All this is for my is professional validation of my already formed personal opinion.

Simply agreeing with Bob does not mean that we're incapable of thinking on our own, thank you very much.

ccdohl:I thought Spider-Man 3 messed up Uncle Ben's death so badly that anything would be an improvement. I guess I was wrong.

It's what THE ENTIRE FUCKING COMICS INDUSTRY does when they're completely out of ideas; Retcon shit in order to keep the story going.

On one hand, I want to go see this movie to see if it sucks or not (because fuck other people's opinions, I make my own), but on the other, I really, really want to see Spiderman in The Avengers 2, and every ticket sold counts...

Fusioncode9:Looking through these comments is just pathetic. Most people here are deciding not to see the movie because of Bob's pointless fanboy rage. Mos reviews call it a solid film, even Roger Ebert enjoyed it. I've seen the movie and it is NO-WHERE near as bad as Bob is saying. It's no The Dark Knight but it's a overall a solid film.

C'mon guys, form you own opinions!

I formed my opinion months ago when I first saw the trailer. I was not impressed. Every trailer since then made me want to see the movie less and less. If the trailers fails to impress me, then I sure as HELL won't be slapping down money to see the full thing. All this is for my is professional validation of my already formed personal opinion.

Simply agreeing with Bob does not mean that we're incapable of thinking on our own, thank you very much.

How deceitful can trailers be, though? What's Your Number had scenes that never appeared in the film, and both Drive and Splice created false expectations as to what kind of movie you were going to see. That, and now that the movie is actually out, reviews are going to hold much more weight than the trailer, aren't they?

As I said earlier, RT has given pretty good reviews, and Ebert threw it a 3.5/4. I'm just saying that it's better to look around and hear different opinions before dismissing a movie entirely.

OK, I', drunk off my arse right noe so this might not maje any sense, but WOW... Bob didn't like this mocie, huh? I could feel the fan rage through the screen. Even in my drunken state, didn't actually hear any reasons why I shouldn't go see it though... just myeh myeh, this movie was made by committee. Seriously, ytjhre amouitnt of rage coming from this guy make me distrist his opinion.

Fusioncode9:Looking through these comments is just pathetic. Most people here are deciding not to see the movie because of Bob's pointless fanboy rage. Mos reviews call it a solid film, even Roger Ebert enjoyed it. I've seen the movie and it is NO-WHERE near as bad as Bob is saying. It's no The Dark Knight but it's a overall a solid film.

C'mon guys, form you own opinions!

I formed my opinion months ago when I first saw the trailer. I was not impressed. Every trailer since then made me want to see the movie less and less. If the trailers fails to impress me, then I sure as HELL won't be slapping down money to see the full thing. All this is for my is professional validation of my already formed personal opinion.

Simply agreeing with Bob does not mean that we're incapable of thinking on our own, thank you very much.

So you figured out the movie sucked just from watching a few minutes of footage from trailer. Then when over a hundred reviewers enjoyed praised it, you found one who hated it not because of any real criticism, but because it's the the film HE wanted it to be, so you decide to use this ONE review to validate your own opinion. Did I get that right?

...wow, I am surprised. Not by moviebob's review, it was clear what his opinion was of this movie way before this review. What I am surprised is how many people LIKED this movie, or how many people seem to think it is great. I just saw the film today before reading this review and...

I thought it was way below average. It's not as bad as moviebob says, but it is still pretty bad. The plot just jumps from place to place while not answering or resolving anything. Peter Parker comes of as a nut. His banter isn't funny nor does it feel in character. He learns nothing (well..except for NOT keeping promises to dying (maybe) loved ones...great message there) and comes of as a douche than a hero. Plus, all of those awkward teenage moments are...I'm sorry, I get socially awkward. I am socially awkward, but Peter awkwardness borders of insanity. Heck, half of the plot-points could be fixed if he just DID something other than stutter and act like a crazy person.

To be fair, the Lizard/Spider-man fights were fun and the other characters were okay (if a bit one-dimensional), but it offered nothing new to the series, and purposely left a bunch of plot holes for no reason than for a sequel. So yeah, I thought the movie was bad too.

Fusioncode9:Looking through these comments is just pathetic. Most people here are deciding not to see the movie because of Bob's pointless fanboy rage. Mos reviews call it a solid film, even Roger Ebert enjoyed it. I've seen the movie and it is NO-WHERE near as bad as Bob is saying. It's no The Dark Knight but it's a overall a solid film.

C'mon guys, form you own opinions!

I formed my opinion months ago when I first saw the trailer. I was not impressed. Every trailer since then made me want to see the movie less and less. If the trailers fails to impress me, then I sure as HELL won't be slapping down money to see the full thing. All this is for my is professional validation of my already formed personal opinion.

Simply agreeing with Bob does not mean that we're incapable of thinking on our own, thank you very much.

You said your formed your opinion on a trailer. A TRAILER!

I have seen the movie, it's great, not the best superhero movie ever, but a really good movie actually. If you just simply agree with one reviewer and say that you got your opinion from the trailer then you really don't have an opinion of your own.

It's quite funny that almost everyone in this thread who has seen it actually likes it but all the people who are dissing it have only seen the trailers or simply watched MovieBob's review.

The "It just so happens..." segment was probably the stupidest thing you could ever have come up with as a criticism of any movie about Spider-man when you actually apply that logic to the fucking source material that you love so much, or for that matter almost any continuity driven comic book series in either DC or Marvel.

Don Savik:I love how many loyal subjects Bob has taken under his cape, willing to despise a movie just on the basis that Bob didn't like it.

Seriously people, grow some opinions of your own.

Do you even know what film reviews are for? We use their opinions to help form our own. Just what is the point of listening to a reviewer if you don't listen to them? Movie Bob here has just saved me £10 - he's done his job.

But there has to be something personal going on with this in particular, because that's horseshit. This was easily my favourite Spider-man movie. It's the only one to get the actual tone of the comics right. Spider-man. Quips. He tells jokes. The lizard is a lot like his current incarnation in the comics.

And all those "it just so happens" moments you mentioned? What are the odds that a person working on a project has a son? Pretty high. There goes the "it just so happens" his dad worked on the spider. What are the odds he worked with other people? Higher than the child likelihood, so there goes the "It just so happens" he works with Connors. And what are the odds he works for a multimillion dollar bio-engineering company? Only a little lower than him having help. There goes the "It just so happens" he works for Norman Osborn. That likelihood gets higher because Reed Richards, Tony Stark, and Hank Pym can't be in this movie. The only "it just so happens" that I can agree with is that Gwen is an intern to Dr. Connors, and that still makes sense because she's the first love interest in any of the movies to actually be as smart as Peter Parker.

You went into this movie not wanting to like it. So you didn't. You didn't look at this movie subjectively, you looked at it as someone with a general contempt for everything going on, looking for every flaw you could find and shining a spotlight on it, to the point in which you essentially created flaws and ignored why the moments were in the film. As you said, you're sharing quite a big with J. Jonah Jameson in that respect.

I'm a big fan of your shows here. But this review made me angry. It was an attack, and that's not cool.